You can get those 'accelerationists' within the coalition by funding lots of research, just don't expect it all to work, don't even need to apply it. Actually I think that 'bias' is realistic. Problem is rather political groups that are missing - religious for example.

[–] keepthepace@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

IT is hilariously biased against nuclear power. Nuclear research is the only one that has a random factor "you have a tiny chance of getting it".

[–] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well you can 'win' leaving current nuclear fraction as is, the old stuff keeps working without any disaster (missing factor ??).
Otoh, nuclear fusion has been tomorrow's breakthrough for half a century ...

[–] keepthepace@slrpnk.net 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Otoh, nuclear fusion has been tomorrow’s breakthrough for half a century …

"Ungrowth" has been a proposed solution for half a century as well, yet this one happens with certainty overnight once the mandate is passed.

It is not just fusion, fast breeder reactors as well. But of course, with them the game becomes much easier. And I love that farm automation has a lower impact than the biochar research.

[–] benjhm@sopuli.xyz 1 points 6 months ago

Indeed, as I mentioned in my main comment

Some of the ‘mandates’ are far too easily implemented.

At least that one requires a 'parliament majority' - otoh big groups are not in that parliament at all... Actually 'ungrowth' in the north may just happen anyway, slowly, for demographic reasons.
Maybe this type of game could provide a structure to help people to debate factors, if could vary (packages of) assumptions... ?
As it is, might encourage some to wait for a revolution rather than engaging current options.